Page 2 of 15 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
12
... LastLast
  1. #21

    Re: Blizzard trademarks "Cataclysm"

    Quote Originally Posted by Baever
    I would definitely look forward to a Gul'dan boss encounter.

    He's a bit dead at the moment...

    http://www.wowhead.com/?item=32483

    The Skull of Gul'dan was a powerful demonic artifact created from the skull of the orc sorcerer Gul'dan. Used for a plethora of demonic activity, from opening portals to corrupting the forests of Ashenvale, its powers were finally consumed by Illidan Stormrage. Although weakened, the skull still holds power and is in Illidan's possession.
    I may look busy, but I'm just confused.

  2. #22

    Re: Blizzard trademarks "Cataclysm"

    Quote Originally Posted by ralusek
    because blizzard has confirmed their new mmo is an entirely new franchise. no world of starcraft, no new wow, no diablo. NEW
    However, It could be the name of that new mmo.
    Are we having fun yet?

  3. #23

    Re: Blizzard trademarks "Cataclysm"

    Quote Originally Posted by mercutiouk
    Just something someone can maybe clear up.

    There was a something somewhere (be it in game or on wowwiki or whatever) that talked about "murlocs showing up in greater numbers on our shores, as if they are running from something" not exactly like that but words to that effect. Where have I read this before? Just trying to think of WHY we'd take a sudden interest in the maelstrom now after x thousand years. I don't doubt the maelstrom IS the next expansion nor that the title for it will be Cataclysm (been saying Maelstrom expansion for quite a while, feel free to go check my old posts here before calling me out) just couldn't work out an existing lore reason we'd be suddenly bothered about it.

    well on nearly every coast you could find either murlocs or naga, see those as "explorers" that are awaiting an order of the queen to attack us...
    or: azshara maanged to learn some old highborn magic and is becoming a treat

    I wonder if timbermaw hold and/or the bg in azshara get done

  4. #24

    Re: Blizzard trademarks "Cataclysm"

    Quote Originally Posted by YumYum
    weeeheee!

    so the next continent will most likely be kezan, with a goblin capital
    http://www.wowwiki.com/Kezan
    If the next exapnsion is the great sea, you can expect MANY new continents and islands But yeah, Undermind will obviously be the new neutral city.

  5. #25

    Re: Blizzard trademarks "Cataclysm"

    Quote Originally Posted by mercutiouk
    Just something someone can maybe clear up.

    There was a something somewhere (be it in game or on wowwiki or whatever) that talked about "murlocs showing up in greater numbers on our shores, as if they are running from something" not exactly like that but words to that effect. Where have I read this before? Just trying to think of WHY we'd take a sudden interest in the maelstrom now after x thousand years. I don't doubt the maelstrom IS the next expansion nor that the title for it will be Cataclysm (been saying it for quite a while, feel free to go check my old posts here before calling me out) just couldn't work out an existing lore reason we'd be suddenly bothered about it.

    Eh, to be honest, we let Arthas run free for the better part of four years, even though he was *supposedly* perfectly capable of obliterating all that is Azeroth.

    Blizzard has the power to delay lore and create it on the go, even if some players frown upon it. Even though normally I love to see the story lines interconnecting without Blizzard having to intentionally fill the gaps, there's enough lore already developed for Maelstrom and the surrounding area, that I really don't care if I have plausible reasons for suddenly finding my character interested in what may lay there.

  6. #26

    Re: Blizzard trademarks "Cataclysm"

    Quote Originally Posted by Cerin

    He's a bit dead at the moment...

    http://www.wowhead.com/?item=32483
    So was Archimonde, last time I checked. He still found his way into TBC.

    Oh the power of CoT.

  7. #27

    Re: Blizzard trademarks "Cataclysm"

    Quote Originally Posted by Cerin

    He's a bit dead at the moment...

    http://www.wowhead.com/?item=32483
    "Don't look so smug. Illidan was merely a setback."

    Also, they brought Arugal back even though we took his head:
    http://www.wowwiki.com/Quest:Out_of_Body_Experience
    Playing since Patch 1.11 (Draenor & Icecrown - PvE).

  8. #28
    Deleted

    Re: Blizzard trademarks "Cataclysm"

    Gief Maelstrom, and the sunny beaches on Tel Abim :-*

  9. #29

    Re: Blizzard trademarks "Cataclysm"

    Kezan Isle would be so cool, I love goblins and STV has been my fav zone since vanilla :)

  10. #30

    Re: Blizzard trademarks "Cataclysm"

    Quote Originally Posted by Daveyjones
    However, It could be the name of that new mmo.
    I'm betting this is the case. I'd be surprised if more expansions are released for World of Warcraft, for the following reasons:

    • Like it or not, graphically, the game is showing its age
    • What they're able to do with boss encounters with this engine is showing its limits. Phasing introduced some cool stuff but there are still too many fights that come down to "move here, move here, hit the orb, oh, he's going to enrage," etc.
    • This is the biggest one. They haven't even released or announced anything about Icecrown yet, and Starcraft 2 is supposedly coming within the next year, if not the next half year. Then they have Diablo 3 after that. This is going to eat into Warcraft subscriptions. I think it's much more likely that Wrath will be the last expansion, then they'll ride SC2 and D3 for a few years, then release the new MMO.
    • Another WOW expansion is going to be impossible to balance. They had enough trouble integrating the DK and with another expansion we can only assume there will be another 10 levels worth of skills along with a new tier of talents that they'd have to worry about. I don't think it's likely that they feel prepared to do this.
    • Where does the lore go after this? Wrath was a lot better about this, but they've shown that advancing the story meaningfully has been very difficult given the constraints of the game. Arthas was pretty much the bad guy at the end of War3, and it's taken two expansions (including one with blue aliens and spaceships) just to get to this point.

    I wouldn't be shocked either way, because Warcraft is clearly a huge cash cow for them, but I figure with two games on the horizon they have to figure this golden goose is going to dry up a little bit and they don't have an infinite amount of development resources. Cataclysm isn't an uncommon word and just because there was an event referred to as the Cataclysm in Warcraft doesn't necessarily mean that it's referring to another Warcraft expansion. I'm betting for the next couple of years, WoW is going to be sustained by content updates and not a new expansion.

    But I could be wrong. You guys certainly don't seem to agree with this synopsis. We'll see!

  11. #31

    Re: Blizzard trademarks "Cataclysm"

    Aaaah, to be honest, I really prayed for "The Emerald Dream".. Malfurion Stormrage, Warden hero class... Goblins? Not so sure.

  12. #32

    Re: Blizzard trademarks "Cataclysm"



    Really, really, really, really, really, really, really looks like an early map of the new area.

    On the World of Warcraft Behind the Scenes DVD there was a map of the Isle of Kezan, which is above the Undermine, visible on a whiteboard. It shows:

    * Three transportation paths to: Booty Bay (by boat), Kul Tiras (by boat), and Ratchet (by zeppelin). Valgarde is also somehow connected.
    * What seems to be a lake in the center of the island, with rivers connecting it to both ports and Mount Kajaro.
    * Four coastal zones: Resort Beach, Savage Beach, Black Beach, and Rain Forest
    * Naga Gate off the western coast.
    Source: WoWWiki

  13. #33

    Re: Blizzard trademarks "Cataclysm"

    Can I have a 'hell' and a 'yeah'?

  14. #34

    Re: Blizzard trademarks "Cataclysm"

    Only a month left before we know more!

  15. #35

    Re: Blizzard trademarks "Cataclysm"

    Kewl, looks like the list everybody links one time or another is still 100% accurate

    The Emerald Dream will be after the next one I guess...
    Why can't I upload images for my signature

  16. #36

    Re: Blizzard trademarks "Cataclysm"

    Hehe, now the list just have to get all the zones correctly

  17. #37
    Dreadlord Ibbi's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    California
    Posts
    914

    Re: Blizzard trademarks "Cataclysm"

    That infamous list of those expansions for WoW is on the third one right!

    This expansion is going to be interesting because it is a bunch of islands instead of a huge landmass like Outland and Northrend. So, I wonder how travel will work between these zones/islands?
    DISCLAIMER: Reader discretion advised. The above post is entirely fictional and purely for entertainment purposes only. Any similarities to real life events, animals, humans, persons, politicians, or any other form of entity, living, dead or in any other state of existence, is purely coincidental. The author cannot and will not be held accountable for such similarities or any other parallels that are imagined and/or drawn by you, the reader, between the above fictional work and real life events.

  18. #38

    Re: Blizzard trademarks "Cataclysm"

    Quote Originally Posted by hotdogsamurai
    I'm betting this is the case. I'd be surprised if more expansions are released for World of Warcraft, for the following reasons:

    • Like it or not, graphically, the game is showing its age
    • What they're able to do with boss encounters with this engine is showing its limits. Phasing introduced some cool stuff but there are still too many fights that come down to "move here, move here, hit the orb, oh, he's going to enrage," etc.
    • This is the biggest one. They haven't even released or announced anything about Icecrown yet, and Starcraft 2 is supposedly coming within the next year, if not the next half year. Then they have Diablo 3 after that. This is going to eat into Warcraft subscriptions. I think it's much more likely that Wrath will be the last expansion, then they'll ride SC2 and D3 for a few years, then release the new MMO.
    • Another WOW expansion is going to be impossible to balance. They had enough trouble integrating the DK and with another expansion we can only assume there will be another 10 levels worth of skills along with a new tier of talents that they'd have to worry about. I don't think it's likely that they feel prepared to do this.
    • Where does the lore go after this? Wrath was a lot better about this, but they've shown that advancing the story meaningfully has been very difficult given the constraints of the game. Arthas was pretty much the bad guy at the end of War3, and it's taken two expansions (including one with blue aliens and spaceships) just to get to this point.

    Just.. no. If you look at the WoW playerbase, it would make no sense at all to suddenly stop developing it. Starcraft and Diablo have a whole different developer teams, they really dont affect WoW, and I completely disagree with the balance issues. I dont see why would it be any harder to balance it at level 90 than now, we dont even know will there be any new classes, I really doubt it


  19. #39
    High Overlord Maximelene's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Cherbourg (Normandie, France)
    Posts
    104

    Re: Blizzard trademarks "Cataclysm"

    Quote Originally Posted by Herecius
    Can I have a 'hell' and a 'yeah'?
    HELL YEAH !!!

  20. #40

    Re: Blizzard trademarks "Cataclysm"

    Seriously though, are we approaching the end of WoW?

    With names like Azshara and Sargeras, this sounds like the end.

    Is it possible that the new MMO is nearing 50% completion? Because if Cataclysm ends up being as epic as speculated, WoW only has a little over two years left.
    BAMF.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •